The myths about the Terri Schiavo case are repeated so often, it can be a futile effort to keep the story straight.

One such myth is that the family somehow edited videos of Terri to make it appear falsely that she was conscious. The latest example of this false claim comes gratuitously in a story on Jahi McMath in the New Yorker:

I had a co-worker at the time, who said the she (the co-worker) had anorexia and starving is euphoric. She said Terri wasnt suffering.....not even when I asked about the withdrawal of WATER. Nope, Terri was experiencing euphoria. Not kidding.

5
posted on 01/29/2018 10:16:50 AM PST
by originalbuckeye
('In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act'- George Orwell)

Her husband worked with the local jail as part of his job. He knew how to work the system to get her parents to sign releases over legal control to him early on. He didn’t want a divorce, he wanted her dead so he could marry his new girlfriend. This guy was scum. Scum.

I think what many are missing in this story is Terri was murdered by the government. People act like a probate lawyer had the right to sentence her to death even though she committed no crime. A guy that decides who gets the silverware of an estate cannot pass criminal judgements against anyone. The only way for the government to put someone to death is by a finding of guilty by a jury of a capital crime. Her husband wanted to kill her as you would a family animal so he could remarry and not be a bigamist. The Schiavo case brings back memories of Dredd Scott. Dredd Scott was personal property and was found to the be the property of another man even though the law said he was free. One could say he was a big part of the cause of the Civil War. The SCOTUS proved the law was flexible on who was covered and who was not. We started to murder babies in 1973. They were a woman's property, just as slaves were in the 1860's. Now Terri was found to be someone's property to be disposed of as they will. Somehow, as no one can seem to explain, she lost her inalienable rights and a probate judge could decide life and death for her. Many murderers don't get the death penalty for killing multiple people. She hurt no one and was murdered. In this country, try to imagine what would happen if I was caught starving my cat with no food and water. Yet people that have taken an oath to not hurt people couldn't even give her a drink of water for 2 weeks. Through no fault of Terri, she will be the poster child of fascism in America as people were allowed to kill someone for convenience. Her parents wanted to care for her. Arguments were made that they weren't trained to care for her, yet the trained people killed her. Always remember, if they can kill a baby, they can kill you. If they can starve Terri, they can starve you in a gulag chained to a post. The principle is the same. Much is made of whether or not she could see or hear, but that doesn't really matter. There are literally millions in nursing homes right now bedridden, on feeding tubes, that cannot move. Hitler went through the homes and murdered millions because HE felt they had no reason to live. I have asked scores of disabled people if they wish they had been aborted and not ONE has ever said yes.

I'm absolutely sick of hearing people say they wouldn't want to live like that. IT'S NOT UP TO THEM! If you want to die if you get disabled, get a living will today! Stay away from me and mine, however. If you Google some coma cases, you will see many cases of people in coma's for years, that come out of them years later. People can't seem to wait to pull the plug. This case was between Terri's husband and Terri's parents. Why we felt like we had a vote is beyond me. Legally, we failed her completely. How this judge remained in control after the inspections all the way to the SCOTUS and back is baffling to me. It seem even a Public Defender could protest a civil judge deciding a criminal case. Why didn't the probate judge just fine her $100 and close the case? He certainly can't decide capital cases. I would love chapter and verse of the civil law that calls for execution by starving.

I know people don't seem to see the same things I see, but I'm just as baffled that no one else sees executing people as a whim is NOT LEGAL,......unless no one says something. Where are the legal debates discussing the precedents of the case for execution for brain damage? This is VERY DANGEROUS to just leave this where it is right now. Some day, ObamaCare could argue they have the right to clear out whole wings of hospitals because they are filled with non productive people on feeding tubes, and use the Shiavo case as a reference. A significant level of nursing homes are on feeding tubes right now. Do we now consider feeding tubes as extraordinary live support?

BTW, I'm just as exercised about Waco and Ruby Ridge as unanswered legal quagmires left unfinished, leaving America teetering on the abyss of Anarchy. Anyone that thinks the law cannot be skirted by the mob and media is kidding themselves.

What we are watching today is the dismantling of the MSM as fake news headquarters able to sway the masses into a blood thirsty mob. Somehow we justified murdering women and children because David Koresh married underage children and sold guns at gun shows for money. I'm sure all those cooked children are thankful they were saved by the BATF from a fate worse than death with Koresh.

No matter what we think of David Koresh, we should disapprove of frying 80 people just to get him. All the locals said he could have been arrested for questioning several times a week in town alone. It was pretty dramatic on the MSM however. The camera's got the shot, as they say.

We need to examine if the BLM movement is a legit movement or a terrorist organization promoting murder and the MSM is supporting the mob AGAIN! The media is not used to NOT controlling the discussion. What if people would have stood for Terri, or marched to stop the siege of Waco? Was Waco really that important they they all die because they owned a few guns? People in Texas didn't think so, but NYC thought these people were terrorists planning a revolution on America. When your home is a "compound" and 3 guns is an arsenal, it's easy to get the natives riled up.

On March 31, 2005 a letter I had sent to a journalist at the Vail Daily was published.

This is the letter: Suppose, just suppose that Terri Schaivo never told her husband that she didnt want to be kept alive by tubes. There is no proof that she said any such thing. Suppose he just wants to get rid of her because she is inconvenient to him. After all, he has lived with another woman for 10 years and has two children with her. He wont divorce Terri because he hates her parents and wants them to suffer, too. Consider that he didnt remember that she had said she didnt want to be kept alive until seven years after she collapsed.If the above scenario is true, then the judiciary has been complicit with Michael Schiavo in the murder of his wife, yes the murder. She is not on life support. In order to kill her, he had to have her starved to death. He even got Judge Greer to rule that feeding her by mouth constituted an experimental procedure and was therefore not allowed. Who will be next? Cant you see the terrible precedent this sets? What if someone decides that Granny told them once that she didnt want to be kept alive in a nursing home? Sounds pretty easy to me. Relatives are tired of paying for her care. They want their inheritance. Starve her to death.Are you also saying that the mentally retarded and autistic children dont have much of a life, so should also be starved?If we cant protect those in our society that cannot protect themselves, then we are a sorry lot.You know, the Nazis did away with the mentally ill that were in hospitals in Germany. They didnt fit into the view of the perfect society, so they had them killed. Right now, we are no better.

I had people call and threaten me, and tell me what an idiot I was (anonymously, of course. Cowards!)

I remember that too. And I remember their names. Some were finally banned albeit for other reasons. I remember a court flunky of Greer’s signing up on FR and saying horrible things. It was a bad, bad time.

17
posted on 01/29/2018 2:04:29 PM PST
by DJ MacWoW
(The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)

I agree with you 100%. What was done to that woman was horrid. The doors that we’re opened, even worse.

And the worst of it is the contradiction of principles! You talked about human beings being considered another’s personal property under some circumstances, yet when an aborted infant is born alive, it’s still the property of the mother and can still be murdered. But if that child enters preschhool, it becomes the property of the state. Contradictions.

Terry was loved and wanted, but she was aborted from the living just the same as if she were an unwanted tonsil.

Don’t know about starving being euphoric but have you ever seen happy starving people?

There was a woman speaking out the during Terry’s court case. She had been in a coma and a decision was made to cut off her food and fluids. She came out of coma. She said dehydration is total anguish.

Terry’s parents wanted to take her home. Her murderer who stood to inherit Terris medical trust fund, which at the time was close to $800,000 wanted her dead. That sick Judge ruled for the killer. The whole thing was totally, totally disgusting.

IIRC They did a routine cause of death autopsy not a criminal investigation autopsy The whole thing was a travesty.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.